If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Nobody expects you to change your mind about the Bush years. Nobody expects you to stop speaking your mind about it. I just find it ridiculous (and telling) that some of those on the left can't manage to have a conversation about the actions of a Democrat without comparing it to the actions of a Republican. Why can't you just discuss the issue at hand? For example, I will not justify the excessive spending and pork-barrel projects that happened while the Republicans controlled Congress by citing examples of the same thing since the Dems took control. I was pissed off when the Republicans did it and I'm pissed off that the Dems do it. I will not justify Bush's actions in Iraq or Afganistan by comparing them to Clinton's actions in Bosnia or Somalia. I will, however, discuss Bush's actions, Clinton's actions, or Obama's actions on their own merits. From my perspective, the inability to directly discuss the issue without inserting the dig at Bush seriously diminishes the credibility of the poster. One man's opinion.

Thank you, Matt. Can't say I disagree much. But, we are still dealing with a bases loaded, nobody out situation, the last pitcher left us with.

But, we are still dealing with a bases loaded, nobody out situation, the last pitcher left us with.

- Were you not the person commenting about barroom courage? My experience has been that those calling attention to the failings of others are just trying to divert attention from their own failings.

The last pitcher has been relieved - this pitcher wanted the opportunity - He was given unprecedented access prior to taking on the responsibility - so what does he do - makes a big deal out of changing previous policy & finds himself in deep excrement - proposes a budget that will create unprecedented deficits. Now that appears to me that the reliever allowed a home run, cleared the bases & is managing to load them up on his own, a couple of times.

Had the previous POTUS made all the boneheaded choices this guy has signed off on, your media would have crucified him. A CIA director with a daughter that is a Communist-Socialist admirer - .

But continue to bash the previous POTUS & you will marginalize yourself as Jeff has with his support of all things LEFT.

- Were you not the person commenting about barroom courage? My experience has been that those calling attention to the failings of others are just trying to divert attention from their own failings.

The last pitcher has been relieved - this pitcher wanted the opportunity - He was given unprecedented access prior to taking on the responsibility - so what does he do - makes a big deal out of changing previous policy & finds himself in deep excrement - proposes a budget that will create unprecedented deficits. Now that appears to me that the reliever allowed a home run, cleared the bases & is managing to load them up on his own, a couple of times.

Had the previous POTUS made all the boneheaded choices this guy has signed off on, your media would have crucified him. A CIA director with a daughter that is a Communist-Socialist admirer - .

But continue to bash the previous POTUS & you will marginalize yourself as Jeff has with his support of all things LEFT.

Marv, the previous POTUS may have been a a favorite of yours, but the financial collapse happened on his watch. For me it has meant a disappearance of a good part of my life savings. I am not about to recommend him for sainthood.

Adult children don't always follow their parent's ideology. To beat on the CIA chief for his daughter's belief is unfair. In fact, it sounds a bit like the late Senator from Wisconsin. I hope you don't consider Tail Gunner Joe a saint.

I don't believe Obama has wrecked the country yet. To say his proposals didn't work or won't work is way too premature. The large deficits concern me, however. But, shrinking the government by hamstringing and gutting the oversight is no way to fly.

Marv, you sound like a literate guy. What would you do if you were POTUS??

......
But continue to bash the previous POTUS & you will marginalize yourself as Jeff has with his support of all things LEFT.

Sorry about the partial quote but I figured I would only address my own "marginal" existence. Marvin, you have previously expressed pride in the fact that you were rated the most conservative candidate around in your brief political career. Did it occur to you that from that exalted position almost the entire country is to the left? Just saying....

Congress approved landmark legislation today that opens the door for a new era on Wall Street in which commercial banks, securities houses and insurers will find it easier and cheaper to enter one another's businesses.
The measure, considered by many the most important banking legislation in 66 years, was approved in the Senate by a vote of 90 to 8 and in the House tonight by 362 to 57. The bill will now be sent to the president, who is expected to sign it, aides said. It would become one of the most significant achievements this year by the White House and the Republicans leading the 106th Congress.
''Today Congress voted to update the rules that have governed financial services since the Great Depression and replace them with a system for the 21st century,'' Treasury Secretary Lawrence H. Summers said. ''This historic legislation will better enable American companies to compete in the new economy.''
The decision to repeal the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 provoked dire warnings from a handful of dissenters that the deregulation of Wall Street would someday wreak havoc on the nation's financial system. The original idea behind Glass-Steagall was that separation between bankers and brokers would reduce the potential conflicts of interest that were thought to have contributed to the speculative stock frenzy before the Depression.
Today's action followed a rich Congressional debate about the history of finance in America in this century, the causes of the banking crisis of the 1930's, the globalization of banking and the future of the nation's economy.
Administration officials and many Republicans and Democrats said the measure would save consumers billions of dollars and was necessary to keep up with trends in both domestic and international banking. Some institutions, like Citigroup, already have banking, insurance and securities arms but could have been forced to divest their insurance underwriting under existing law. Many foreign banks already enjoy the ability to enter the securities and insurance industries.
''The world changes, and we have to change with it,'' said Senator Phil Gramm of Texas, who wrote the law that will bear his name along with the two other main Republican sponsors, Representative Jim Leach of Iowa and Representative Thomas J. Bliley Jr. of Virginia. ''We have a new century coming, and we have an opportunity to dominate that century the same way we dominated this century. Glass-Steagall, in the midst of the Great Depression, came at a time when the thinking was that the government was the answer. In this era of economic prosperity, we have decided that freedom is the answer.''
In the House debate, Mr. Leach said, ''This is a historic day. The landscape for delivery of financial services will now surely shift.''
But consumer groups and civil rights advocates criticized the legislation for being a sop to the nation's biggest financial institutions. They say that it fails to protect the privacy interests of consumers and community lending standards for the disadvantaged and that it will create more problems than it solves.
The opponents of the measure gloomily predicted that by unshackling banks and enabling them to move more freely into new kinds of financial activities, the new law could lead to an economic crisis down the road when the marketplace is no longer growing briskly.
''I think we will look back in 10 years' time and say we should not have done this but we did because we forgot the lessons of the past, and that that which is true in the 1930's is true in 2010,'' said Senator Byron L. Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota. ''I wasn't around during the 1930's or the debate over Glass-Steagall. But I was here in the early 1980's when it was decided to allow the expansion of savings and loans. We have now decided in the name of modernization to forget the lessons of the past, of safety and of soundness.''
Senator Paul Wellstone, Democrat of Minnesota, said that Congress had ''seemed determined to unlearn the lessons from our past mistakes.''

Sorry about the partial quote but I figured I would only address my own "marginal" existence. Marvin, you have previously expressed pride in the fact that you were rated the most conservative candidate around in your brief political career. Did it occur to you that from that exalted position almost the entire country is to the left? Just saying....

That's Fiscal conservative, the public employees union was worried I would not cater to their whining. But I'll give you one you'll have a hard time getting left of - as a social moderate I believe we should legalize prostitution, regulate & tax the bejesus out of the practice. You are fond of telling us of your foreign experiences & how they do things so much better in other countries, guess that's why so many are clamoring to go there.

I worked & lived in mining camps so have a little experience (not 1st hand) with the practice. In fact, one of my shift bosses used to be a 12 year old paperboy in the crib area. Said they were his best customers as far as paying their bill promptly. In the mining camps you rarely heard of the crime of rape, though the Butte camp had as many as 35,000 miners in it's heyday, most of whom were single. The people most sorry to see the practice stopped were the elected officials & the men in blue, they all had to tone their life style down. I hope you can figure that out.

Marv, the previous POTUS may have been a a favorite of yours, but the financial collapse happened on his watch. For me it has meant a disappearance of a good part of my life savings. I am not about to recommend him for sainthood.

The previous POTUS was the best choice available, twice - I was not happy with his fiscal bumbling - Nor was I happy with some of his policies & catering to fringe groups. I'm sorry about your losses, we've all had a few this time, but as I explain to my sons it's probably a buying opportunity in stocks that will not come along again for many years.

Adult children don't always follow their parent's ideology. To beat on the CIA chief for his daughter's belief is unfair.

What if in this case the daughter is following what she was taught at home? Are you comfortable with that? I raised 4 sons, all successful, I will tell you the acorn does not fall too far from the tree.

I don't believe Obama has wrecked the country yet. To say his proposals didn't work or won't work is way too premature. The large deficits concern me, however. But, shrinking the government by hamstringing and gutting the oversight is no way to fly.

I do not like the way they are strung out, there is too much money for the labor fakers. In fact I read a very good article in Wired on the electric grid & what stupid mandates & deregulation have done to it. The present POTUS is trying to take credit for something already in the works & increasing the price with his participation.

Marv, you sound like a literate guy. What would you do if you were POTUS??

1st - I would begin by keeping my campaign promises?
2nd - Knowing those jobs require competent people I would have had some candidates in mind. The prior POTUS had a problem with attracting competence.
3rd - I would concentrate on value added updates & additions to the infrastructure, which I believe has been neglected for years. If it's non value added, it don't happen.
4th - I would veto any bill that contained earmarks of any sort - but would provide states with a lump sum to work on those projects noted in the 3rd item.
5th - I would use the bully pulpit to institute change that benefitted the country as a whole.

That's it, doesn't sound very hard, but it works well. Do I believe Health Care needs changing, maybe, but not by a bunch of lawyers.

C'mon, IowaBayDog...you know the rules here...only the most recent Republican President can be held responsible for the current state of our economy. Those pesky facts you keep bringing up will only convolute the issue. Stop it now before our resident libs (notice there's only a handful of them now......) become more apoplectic than they already are....

C'mon, IowaBayDog...you know the rules here...only the most recent Republican President can be held responsible for the current state of our economy. Those pesky facts you keep bringing up will only convolute the issue. Stop it now before our resident libs (notice there's only a handful of them now......) become more apoplectic than they already are....

Only 19 months 'til the CHANGE can be reversed regards,

kg

Whatever happened to accountability, Isn't that one of the defining principles of conservatism? In the short time Obama has been president I have heard on more than one occasion that he is responsible and that he will shoulder the blame for what happens. I kind of welcome that myself.
It would seem then that in your world Bush should be absolved of any accountability in the current financial crisis. There is certainly plenty of blame to go around and the previous president deserves some of it.

Whatever happened to accountability, Isn't that one of the defining principles of conservatism? In the short time Obama has been president I have heard on more than one occasion that he is responsible and that he will shoulder the blame for what happens. I kind of welcome that myself.
It would seem then that in your world Bush should be absolved of any accountability in the current financial crisis. There is certainly plenty of blame to go around and the previous president deserves some of it.

OK. Bush is responsible for a significant portion of the financial crisis. Now what? Can we move on? Or do we continue to use this to excuse the actions of everyone else who is taking advantage of the situation to push a leftist agenda and monumental government spending? At what point do you stop looking at what Bush did and start looking at what our leaders are doing TODAY?

Matt McKenzie

"Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is probably the reason why so few engage in it." Henry Ford